Since the publication of Malachi Martin's WINDSWEPT HOUSE (Doubleday) early this summer, everyone who has read it is asking the same question: Is it all true?

The brilliantly conceived and elegantly written novel presents Vatican City as a nest of intrigue, where the Holy Father is cautiously temporizing as disloyal cardinals subvert his Papacy and scheme with government and business elites in London and Brussels to advance the New World Order.

Believing that the Church must be a key player in the New World Order - primarily for financial reasons - and that Catholic doctrine on key issues must be "moderated," "transformed," or simply dropped in order for the Church to be accepted as a player in the new power structure, the Pope's unfaithful cardinals plot to isolate John Paul II.

That plot - along with dozens of other subplots, ''wheels within wheels " - boils rapidly, making WINDSWEPT HOUSE a thrilling, if somewhat disconcerting, novel.

The novel's title, WINDSWEPT HOUSE, takes its name from a grand home in Galveston, Texas, occupied by an old, very wealthy, and prominent Catholic family which over the centuries has provided valuable services to the Holy See. Two members of that family, brothers - one a priest, the other a lawyer - are the novel's chief protagonists, but they are merely pawns in a high-stakes chess game on which hinges the future social, economic, political, and spiritual development of the world.

Of course, if the work is entirely fiction, Martin's latest book can be dismissed as merely the product of an overly stimulated Irish imagination. If it is largely true, every Catholic should both appreciate the peril the present Pontiff is in, and pray that the Lord have mercy on His Church.

Is WINDSWEPT HOUSE true? That's the question THE WANDERER put to Martin in a recent telephone interview.

Q: How is Windswept House selling since its release in June?

A: The book is selling steadily, all over the country, with no dip in sales yet. Almost 55,000 copies in hardcover are in circulation, and the book is expected to come out in paperback within a year.

Q: What are the reviewers saying?

A: The reviewers are doing a gang review with my book and Andrew Greeley's White Smoke, which is a novel about the election of a Pope. The extraordinary thing is that the reviewers are calling Greeley a conservative compared to me. Greeley is saying that we can elect another Pope and go on with the same ecclesiastical behavior and treatment of the Church, but they should elect a good liberal Pope. My book is radical, because it says the organization is spent, and can't go on. That's the implication of Windswept House.

There have been no bad reviews as far as I know.

Q: Have you received any comments from any important Church leaders?

A: Yes, I have. I cannot quote names. Some approved highly, some disapproved highly, with those disapproving challenging the thesis of the story. Those who approve say it's about time someone started telling the truth.

Q: In general, what reaction has there been among most readers?

A: Those who correspond with me or talk to me on the radio shows I have been doing are thanking me for "telling it like it is." Then they ask: Now what is to be done? What are we to do? That is the question answered in the sequel to Windswept House, which I am writing now.

Q: The burning question among Wanderer readers who have read the book is: How much of Windswept House is true?

A: To speak in percentages, roughly 85% of the fictional characters mirror real people, and roughly 85% of events in the book mirror real events, except those which are obviously mythic, such as the final stay of the Slavic Pope in Poland. We are talking about real events and real people masked in the form of a novel; nowadays it is called faction, a term coined by Norman Mailer, but an art form really created by Taylor Caldwell.

Q: Is there such a place as Windswept House? Are there really such people as the Gladstones? Is there as much intrigue in the corridors of the Vatican as you suggest?

A: The answer to all three is yes; and with regard to the last, the answer is yes, and more.

While we believe and know by our belief that the Holy Roman Catholic Church is centered in Rome in the person of the Pope, we also know that clustered around his persona, whoever he is, there has grown up a highly skilled chancery and this is seated in a sovereign Vatican City State which enjoys a prestige and global position that no other organization enjoys.

It would be impossible, humanly speaking, and only a miracle could prevent it from happening, that such a spiritual power clothed in sociopolitical garb and living for so long - roughly 1,700 years in full vigor - for the intrigue not to be intense.

If one wants reasons for that, consider a few points: The Vatican has 180 ambassadors who desire to be represented diplomatically with the Holy See. That costs money and personnel, which countries are willing to spend. Apparently, it is worth it.

Second, the Pope has 80 personal ambassadors in over 80 countries, including all the highly industrialized countries and around the world.

Third, the nominal membership of the Catholic Church is almost one billion. It is the only example today of a global organization up and running, even though it is inefficient in terms of promoting its religious mission.

There Is No Evangelization

Q: Regarding that "inefficiency," your book presents a scene in which Pope John Paul II laments the fact that Pope Paul VI's "new evangelization" never got off the ground, and, in fact, your book shows Vatican intriguers boasting about their successful "antievangelization" efforts around the globe over the past 30 years. Can you elaborate on that?

A: There is no doubt that throughout this global organization, there is no vibrancy, there is no burning initiative, there is no manifest movement to convert, to spread the Catholic faith as the Catholic faith. There is no evangelization. We have even gone so far as to have our Churchmen suggest that the Gospel of John should be revised to meet the new concept of Catholicism.

This new concept is enshrined in the movement we call ecumenism, exemplified by the agreement signed with the Orthodox in Lebanon a year ago, in which all the parties agreed not to evangelize each other.

Q: Since you mention the revision of St. John's Gospel, what did you think of Joseph Cardinal Bernardin's famous speech at Hebrew University during Lent, 1995 when he described the Gospel of John as a well of anti-Semitism?

A: That was certainly one of the clearest manifestations of the apostasy into which His Eminence Cardinal Bernardin and other members of the Sacred College have fallen: They have decided that for the good of humanity the Roman Catholic organization should collaborate completely with the New World Order and its demographic and educational exigencies - population limitation and the takeover of schools by the state. His Eminence is not alone in this apostasy. Without rnentioning names, you can safely say that over one-third of the Sacred College shares his point of view.

Q: Is this view assumed for religious reasons primarily or is it as you suggest, for financial reasons?

A: Their choice has been made because they have lost the Roman Catholic faith. They are sincerely attached to the New World Order's promise of peace and plenty.

Q: Is there such a mountain as Aminadab outside of Jerusalem, at the peak of which is a Masonic Lodge? Some readers suspect you are referring to Tantur, a gathering place for some of the most liberal Catholic ecumenists in the world. Is Aminadab Tantur?

A: No. Aminadab is an actual hill or mountain, and from it you can see the Lebanese mountains, the Mediterranean, and the mountains of the Sinai peninsula. The Masonic Lodge building at the peak is an invention, but there is a large lodge in Israel to which Catholics, Muslims, and Jews be long. This ecumenical lodge believes that all these religions have a contribution to make to the sociocultural and sociopolitical stability of nations. It is purely and simply on the natural plane.

Q: You describe a gruesome murder in Century City (Chicago) when introducing readers to your Cardinal Leonardine (Bernardin). There are a number of people who will be very disturbed when they see that murder described, because they know you are recording an event that actually took place. If you have the story on that ritual murder, why not tell it as fact, and not fiction?

A: Because I am writing a novel, and I am not blaming any body, living or dead, nor am I fixing any responsibility to anyone no more than any novelist does. Let those who write factual reports please write it. It is about time they fulfill their duties.

Q: How do you know a common effort among business and Church elites to create a New World Order exists? For example, did you ever see any evidence documenting the meeting you de scribe in Strasbourg between top European business leaders and Vatican officials?

A: Strasbourg was a novelistic ploy. There have been several meetings and get-togethers. These are very quiet meetings. They are very private. How does word get out? There is always diplomatic communication and people who pass papers on. It is impossible for such powerful men to get together regularly and to hone their policies to suit each other, without word getting out. It doesn't become public knowledge because no one will talk about it publicly.

This year, for example, between May 29th and June 2nd, the Bilderbergers met in King City, Ontario. There has never been a word about that, even though the purpose of the discussions was to talk about global communications control, an issue that affects every one of us. Attending it were several prominent Americans, including Vernon Jordan.

Q: One of the strongest criticisms of your book is that it is fiction, and it can easily be derided as "just fiction. " If all you say is true, why didn't you name the names? Why didn't you name Agostino Cardinal Casaroli instead of inventing Cardinal Maestroianni, etc.?

A: I am a Roman Catholic priest and have a reverence for prelates and their privacy, no matter how off course they might be. And a certain amount of reverence is implied by fictionalizing their characters and actions.

Besides, it keeps the book in a certain literary genre which is safe to use from the point of view of the public record. And I am not going to write a book judging morally the present regime of cardinals and prelates in the Church unless absolutely necessary for the good of the Church.

A Superb Intelligence System

Q: What do you think generally of the level of skill and competence - from a merely secular point of view - of the staff members in the Secretary of State's office? How do they rate with their peers in the world?

A: They rate very highly, especially the Second Section, which deals with foreign nations. Most recently, there is no doubt that they, under the stimulus of the present Pope, achieved notable results in their struggle against the UN demographers proposing very drastic means of population control.

They out-maneuvered them; they have cultivated parliamentary procedures matching the most malignant of their opponents, because malignant those opponents were in Beijing and Cairo. So they get good marks for that. The measured statement the Second Section allowed the Holy Father to make criticizing President Clinton for partial-birth abortion was strong enough to let the world know that Clinton had committed an abomination.

One of their chief levels of skill is the collection and use of information. They have an Intelligence system which is superb. That is why many nations want representatives in the Vatican. They want the information.

Q: What kind of information are we talking about?

A: The coded messages sent over the wires and in diplomatic pouches are about the stock market, industrial production, academic conditions, economic conditions, family conditions, and so on. They cover every aspect of human life. The Vatican must have this information because it has a very large portfolio invested in every sector.

For example, the Vatican has all the details on what really happened in Burundi between the Hutu and the Tutsi. It won't publish the information because it would reveal the infidelity of the clergy to their Catholic principles: the collapse of the clergy and the bishops, and taking sides and indulging in killing. It was a disgrace. Tribalism won out.

Then there is the fact that it was the Vatican which provided Boris Yeltsin with the shortwave radio he needed to address the Russian people from the top of the tank during the coup.

Now here's the rub for a man like me: I find that lock, stock, and barrel, this skill and intelligence, this romanitas, is now backing the New World Order, fighting for certain things, but backing the New World Order nevertheless, and that's where the difficulty comes.

But it all goes back to Pope Paul VI's closing comments to the bishops in December, 1965 at the end of the council, in which he said that the Church will now collaborate with men in building the human habitat.

Q: But this isn't new, is it? Is this not the 20th-century equivalent of Church and king collaborating as they did 1,000 years ago?

A: The Church never, but never, asserted that it's mission was to help man build a better world. The Church has always asserted that its mission was to save souls to help men get to Heaven. They promulgated laws to make men more moral and less sinful. But to join hands and make religion sub sidiary to the socioeconomic well being of nations is nonsense.

Q: Isn't the Church at the mercy of the New World Order?

A: Yes, if Churchmen insist on not relying on Christ and the queenship of our Lady and rely on purely human means to perpetuate the organization. Whether they like it or not, the Church is perpetual, but the organization they are trying to perpetuate with concessions to the New World Order has nothing to do with their divine mission. There now is an established tradition in realpolitik dating from the reign of John XXIII in 1960 when he refused the mandate of the Virgin as she appeared in Fatima.

The Vatican-Israel accord signed at Christmas, 1994 exemplifies to an extreme degree the length to which the new realpolitik can lead Churchmen.

Q: Doesn't the Vatican-Israel accord signify the failure of the Holy See's diplomatic corps which you previously appraised as the most highly skilled in the world?

A: It means precisely the following: that the Holy See as a financial power was out-maneuvered.

The Burden Of Peter

Q: Often, when an American prelate is praised by the secular media for his ability to "get things done in Rome" - prelates such as Cardinal Bernardin or Pittsburgh's Bishop Donald Wuerl - reporters use the word romanitas to characterize their skill.

No one who reads your book will ever think highly of romanitas again, because the word is loaded with the concepts of blackmail, murder, intrigue, hypocrisy. Is this really what romanitas signifies?

A: It is what romanitas has come to signify in the present epoch. The romanitas of a man like Cardinal Consalvi, the secretary of state dealing with the Congress of Vienna after the Napoleonic wars, cannot be compared to what we have today. Consalvi not only matched wits with giants like Metternich and Castlereagh, but also secured the advantageous position of economic independence of the Holy See. But he did this without conceding one inch either to the rampant republicans or to the very dictatorial attitudes of the imperialists.

The compromisers today are such that romanitas is a means of perpetuating a bureaucratic class which is no longer interested in genuine evangelization.

Ecclesiastical romanitas started in earnest with Pope Sylvester I in the fourth century. He was provided a public identity and power from the Emperor Constantine, and from then on dates the constant enmeshing of the spiritual power with temporal surroundings. Before that, the Church was utterly separate, independent of the temporal power.

The skill Vatican diplomats have developed over 17 centuries has given them a group instinct for where the gravamen of human power in any particular epoch is moving. For a long time it was used for survival; but the enmeshing often became dangerous for the morality of clerics. It also enabled the Church to escape from dilemmas posed to it over 1,700 years, and the guiding light in all cases was always the behavior of the man who was elected Pope.

Q: On the levels of skill and intrigue, how would you compare the diplomatic skill of Churchrnen such as Cardinal Richelieu with Cardinal Casaroli, and do you think Casaroli's accomplishments will be compared to those of Richelieu?

A: Richelieu was, and remains, unmatched for the skill which he used, alone, to change the map of Europe disastrously for the Roman Catholic Church, because he ended up promoting the Protestant powers.

Q: Is the same going on today?

A: Yes, but in an inverse way. The Pope today is as impotent as was Pope Urban VIII in the time of Richelieu. On top of that, the present Holy Father has the added difficulty that there is a complete lack of fervor and enthusiasm for the Catholic cause throughout Europe and the Americas.

The reason this Pope does not get rid of cardinals and bishops who violate traditional rules is that he happens to share the view of the relationship between Pope and bishops according to the postconciliar version of the doctrine of collegiality.

Q: You write in Windswept House that the Pope has his own vision for Europe and the development of the modern world, and he even has a few good men working in support of his plan, against the machinations of the professional intriguers.

Will the Pope succeed over time, or is he in an ecclesiastical end-game?

A: This Holy Father will not succeed in changing the onrush of events which will culminate once he leaves the scene, either by resignation or by death. He simply can not outmaneuver his opponents.

His Papacy has been successful in this basic sense: that nobody can ever doubt his consciousness of carrying the burden of Peter. He has carried the message of Christ all over the world, and given millions the richness of the Gospel.

With his encyclicals, he has provided Catholics with a sheaf of new principles and fresh insights with which they can navigate the New World Order, which will not be a friendly place for Catholics.

Malachi Martin. The Cold War has ended. The Soviet Empire has imploded. With a scope and daring not possible until now, an unlikely international alliance of top-level political, financial, and religious interests sees the way clear at last to its ultimate goal: the establishment of a single global society, the New World Order. With world unity and prosperity as their slogan; with betrayal, scandal, and murder as their ready weapons--the architects of this worldly unity set out to capture the perfect machinery for their global plans: the Vatican. At the vortex of this lethal struggle stands the embattled Pope, a geopolitical genius whose elimination is necessary before Antichrist can be enthroned in St. Peter's Basilica. Two American brothers, one a lawyer and the other a priest, appear to be the perfect pawns. One falls prey to the sharp teeth of greed for power. But what the conspirators cannot know is that the other will become one of the Slavic Pontiff's closest allies...or that he will discover the darkest of hidden things at the very heart of papal Rome. Is Windswept House mere fantasy? Too outrageous to be true? Let reviewers answer: "In biblical times," wrote Dallas Morning News of Malachi Martin, "they would have called him a prophet"; his views, wrote Washington Dateline, "are the stuff of tomorrow's headlines." With descriptions of a Black Mass, a Papal visit with Lucia of Fatima, the reading of the third secret by Pope John XXIII, the decision to forego the release of that secret, the murder of high ranking Vatican officials and more, the reader will be hard pressed to put down this fast moving and apocalyptic assessment of our times. Fact and fiction are woven with such intricacy and skill that this novel will certainly be counted as the best from the pen of a master story-teller.

A Texas lawyer, Sylvia Demarest, has for many years tracked allegations against priests throughout the United States. In a WorldNetDaily article, She told the Washington Post that her updated list of priests who stand accused of molesting children will reach 1,500 names--representing about 2 percent of the 60,000 priests who have served in the United States since 1984" (Catholic bashing and pedophile priests, March 25, 2002).

According to an article in The Boston Globe, the Church has repeatedly declined to undertake its own study of the prevalence of homosexual or sexual abuse among priests.... The article also says that Roderick MacLeish Jr., a Boston lawyer, said 90 percent of the nearly 400 sexual abuse victims he has represented are boys, and three-quarters of them are post-pubescent. Fr. Donald B. Cozzens, a seminary rector in Ohio and author of The Changing Face of the Priesthood, emphasized, roughly 90 percent of priest abusers targeted boys as their victims.

Fr. Fiore, in an interview with WorldNetDaily, insisted, "The problem is not clerical pedophilia," Fiore told WND, "but homosexuality." The distinction is important, Fiore noted, because most victims of Catholic clergy abuse are adolescents. "Strictly speaking," Fiore stated, "pedophilia is the sexual molestation of a pre-pubescent child of either sex," but the overriding problem is the abuse of older children from 12 to 18. "More than 90 percent of the cases," Fiore observed, "involve the clerical molestation of teen-age young men."

The article goes on to say that Fiore was a close friend of priest/author Malachi Martin and supplied Martin with significant material for his later works ('Gay' culture in Catholic Church grows, Toby Westerman, March 24, 2002). This point is significant because one of the last books Malachi Martin wrote before he died was Windswept House, a riveting novel which described a satanic ritual in the Vatican that was simultaneously coordinated with another similar ritual taking place in South Carolina. Many people regard his book a mere fiction, but Martin's affirmation that his book described a real satanic ritual at the Vatican was confirmed by John Loeffler, host of the Steel on Steel radio show. Mr. Loeffler personally asked Fr. Malachi Martin (who had been a regular guest on his show) about the reported dedication to satan within the Vatican:

"You know Malachi confirmed--the first part of his book, Windswept House--he confirmed the dedication of the Vatican to satan in a secret ceremony that occurred unknown even to the Pope at that time, that he managed to pick up. And I did ask him, 'Was this true? Did it happen?' And he [Fr. Martin] said, 'yes, it did.'" - John Loeffler (July 29, 2000 radio show)

Fr. Charles Fiore, who spoke with me at length over the weekend, wanted both critics and supporters to know one thing if they knew no other -- that, first and foremost, Malachi was always a fully functional and -- in the eyes of the Church -- "legal" priest, as well as an avid defender of the traditional Catholic Church.

"I want people to know that after 25 years as a Jesuit, Malachi did in fact receive a special dispensation personally from Pope Paul VI regarding his status within the Church," Fr. Fiore said. "That is perfectly rare, but also perfectly within the rights of the Holy See to grant."

"But Malachi also received permission to remain a priest and made sure he told Paul VI that he desired to keep his vow of chastity so he could continue his work as a laicized priest," Fr. Fiore told me. Malachi still gave Mass, still heard confession, and still was, in fact, a priest in every sense of the word.

Fr. Fiore, who lives in the Diocese of Madison, Wis., and belongs to the priestly fraternity of St. Peter, knew Fr. Martin for over 20 years. He worked, by personal request, as an editor for several of Malachi's best-selling books, and spoke with him at least weekly. In fact, he told me he had spoken with Malachi just a week or so before his death and had discussed, among other things, his newest book -- a nonfiction piece about Vatican power as the Church approaches the third millennium.

Regarding that book, "Primacy: How the Institutional Roman Catholic Church Became a Creature of the New World Order," Fr. Fiore said Malachi indeed believed it would be "his most controversial and important work." However, far from being fiction, the book would have dealt exclusively "with power and the papacy," and would have "analyzed the revolutionary shift in the ancient dogma of primacy that lies at the heart of what many now see as the first breakdown of papal power in two millennia."

In short, it was a book fashioned after one of the things Malachi was most noted for -- his uncanny ability to see through and predict the hidden geopolitics of the Vatican and its "complex global dealings with governments and nations."

"Among his legacies," Fr. Fiore said, "is a decades-long public record of predicting the unthinkable and getting it right every time. Malachi foretold events over the last 30 years that seemed unbelievable at first, but that in the end changed the lives of generations of men and women in every quarter of the world."

"The battle that concerns Martin is the fundamental survival of belief in God, and the struggle that supercedes our individual faiths is the one between us and those who would destroy all faiths," wrote Alan Caruba of Malachi once for "The Jewish Future."

"That was Malachi -- a traditionalist to the end," Fr. Fiore said. There goes that myth.

In fact, what Fr. Martin anguished over the most was the trend away from centuries-old traditions within the Church, and the disunity among religions -- the latter a frequent subject of our current Holy See, Pope John Paul II. Fr. Fiore told me -- and this was echoed by Malachi personally when I interviewed him on a radio show in 1997 -- that Fr. Martin could see the trend towards "liberalization" of the Catholic Church as early as 1964, when Paul VI released him from his vows of obedience and poverty. And he didn't like what he saw and foresaw.

"That was a main reason why Malachi asked to be released," Fr. Fiore said. "He knew that as a Jesuit with an ironclad vow of obedience, he could never speak out against the subversion he saw happening even back then. He had told Paul (VI) that the change of doctrine contained within Vatican II and other political changes were against his conscience."

The rest is, as they say, history. Malachi's books, as well as his scholarly writings, all reflect this point of view and were always uppermost in his mind until his last day. Throughout his commercial writing career -- which amounted to 16 works, many of them bestsellers -- Fr. Fiore said he was continually amazed at the accuracy of his work.

"His last book, 'Windswept House,' for example, was 80 percent factual, by Malachi's own admission to me," Fr. Fiore said. "Many of his works were that accurate."

That did not earn him praise from every sector of the Church, however, and Fr. Fiore -- a Church traditionalist and often outspoken critic of Church policies in his own right -- knows how cynical and potentially damaging that can be to a priest. Credibility often became an issue as forces within and without -- interested in maintaining a "less-than-traditional direction" for the Church -- attacked Malachi's work as a nonsensical impossibility. But, in reality, they could never refute it.

So there it is -- my corrected epitaph for a man who always put God first, not religion. My thanks to Fr. Fiore for setting me -- and those who also appreciated, admired and respected Malachi -- straight.

Yes, but it will not be in any sense fictional. Essentially, it will be manual for survivors.

If I want to become a priest, what seminary do I go to?

It is impossible to answer these questions without knowing the background of candidates for priesthood. In general, however, I would recommend without hesitation that candidates examine the Institute of Christ the King founded by Monsignor Wach.

Is the Novus Ordo a valid mass?

The Novus Ordo rite can be celebrated in such a way as to configure a valid enactment of Christ's sacrifice on Calvary.

If Pope John Paul II has read the third secret of Fatima, why has he not revealed it?

He and his advisors do not think that the message of that third secret should be revealed to the ordinary citizens.

Are you planning on traveling and where are you speaking?

At this time, there are no plans to attend any speaking engagements.

How can one find out if a Papal Indult has indeed been made? There is a rumor that a Papal indult has been given to 41 dioceses in the USA granting the permission to stand during the Consecration?

All such rumors about such a papal indult belong to the land of myth and legend.

Could you give me your opinion of the Sedevacantist movement? As I'm sure you are aware, they believe that St. Peter's chair is vacant and that Pope John Paul II is not a valid pope. In fact, they believe that there hasn't been a valid pope since Pope Pius XII.

Any question about the Sedevacantist condition of the papal throne can only be decided authoritatively by somebody with authority to do so. I am not that person.

I personally like Dietrich Von Hildebrand's assessment of Vatican II. Do you agree with his overall position?

Do you feel that the next Pope unlike the present Pope will be a proponent of the New World Order of which you speak?

I do not know who the next pope will be; so I cannot predict his attitude of policy.

Are Catholics allowed to join Masonic Lodges? If not, why?

No, Catholics are not allowed to join the Masonic Lodge, because Masonry as an organization mentally aims at the destruction of Christianity.

You mentioned on tape that a great Apostasy is upon us and that many of our priests, bishops and cardinals are part either intentionally or unintentionally of this overthrow of the Catholic Church; how would one know whether he should be suspect of his own local clergy?

By examining what doctrines they preach, and their mode of life.

What is your opinion about the abundance of visionaries and seers that we hear about every day?

For the direction of one's life, one can rely explicitly on those which have received approval from the teaching authority of the Roman Catholic Church. As far as I know, these amount to about 6 or 9.

Could the antichrist be a clone?

No, the antichrist is not a clone, unfortunately.

What about the "three days of darkness" many seers mention?

Yes, it is an element in the chastisements prophesied by Our Lady at Fatima. . Is Father Gruner correct that the consecration of Russia as Our Lady desired has not been executed? I'm very confused. Has the consecration been accepted?

No, the consecration demanded by Our Lady has not been performed by the Pope.

I belong to a parish of the Society of St.Pius X. I have heard you speak about the underground church and wondered if you were speaking of the Society. I'm sure you are aware of the problems and accusations made against the Society. What statement, if any, would like to make about the SSPX?

Provided valid Mass is not celebrated within your diocese, attendance at mass at any chapel of the SSPX satisfies all Catholic obligations. Likewise, the sacraments administered by members of the SSPX are quite valid.

My question is what exactly is the underground Church you refer to? Is it Catholics acting outside the normal Church structure?

Yes, that is exactly it. I am referring to a network of bishops, priests, nuns, chapels and schools operating outside the control of the canonical structure of the church.

Since you were a close associate of Cardinal Bea and he read the contents of the third secret of Fatima, did he reveal the contents to you and if he did, can you disclose them to the public?

Yes he did and I cannot.

Why do you suppose that Pope John Paul II excommunicated the saintly Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and does nothing to bishops like: Weakland, Gumbleton, Mahoney, Bernardin, Clark?

In the spiritual reality of the church, neither Marcel Lefebvre, nor his bishops and priests, nor the people who frequent the SSPX chapels suffered or suffer excommunication. I believe history will record that the intent to impose such an excommunication was invalid and illicit.

Do you think that the Antichrist is alive today and if so, do you think he will be revealed in the near future?

Yes. No, I don't think he will be revealed soon.

What do you think about the prophecies of Saint Malachy? He said there would only be two more popes after the Slavic Pope.

I cannot explain the accuracy of St. Malachy´s description of individual popes. His list implies there will be two more popes after John Paul II. We believe that John Paul II is the last pope of Catholic times, but this does not mean there won't be other popes; obviously, not popes of Catholic times.

What is your opinion of Pope John XXIII? Did he really try to stop the Council when he saw what was happening? Did he or did he not believe in Fatima?

No, Pope John XXIII did not try and stop the Council. He did not believe in Fatima.

Did the Enthronement described in Windswept House really take place? If so, has it been undone?

"There is no doubt that throughout this global organization, there is no vibrancy, there is no burning initiative, there is no manifest movement to convert, to spread the Catholic faith as the Catholic faith. There is no evangelization."

Wasn't this the point I was trying to make when I was being critizied by some of the Catholics on this board? I guess I should have written a novel instead.

A book I'll have to read.

6
posted on 05/15/2004 8:05:25 AM PDT
by HarleyD
(For strong is he who carries out God's word. (Joel 2:11))

Mr. Malachi Martin has no credibility for the kind of stuff contained in Windswept House. I've read his book The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church - this "history" book is full of things that never happened like a visit of the descendants of St. Jude to Pope St. Sylvester I.

It has always been RCFs policy to choose our fights carefully and to stay out of disagreements between various Catholic groups  or to avoid involving RCF in projects that would expend resources better used fighting corruption within the hierarchy. With this in mind, I would like to make a statement, as president of RCF, in an effort to answer some of the questions that have packed my mailbox in recent weeks.

I will be in Dallas from June 12-14 and will hold a press conference June 13 to address some of RCFs concerns regarding the current crisis within the Church. A few of our members have expressed their wishes that we not attack the Pope. My response to those concerns follows:

While we love the Holy Father, if we were to ignore the fact that the Pope has not taken direct public action against any American Bishop, we would give the impression that we, too, have somehow failed in our duty as Catholics. We routinely expose the bishops for not dealing with their abusive priests, but our failure to follow through to the ultimate source of authority would be giving a free ride to the only person who can take decisive action against the errant bishop.

Our present Holy Father may be orthodox in his beliefs, but please take a moment to consider the current scandal. Who appointed these bishops? Who left them in power? If this is an example of a great Pope, in what condition would we be if he were a bad one?

I am frequently criticized for the work we do at RCF and for the stories we publish. I cannot and will not let that criticism hinder the decisions I make regarding RCF. God has blessed us, and I pray that He will continue to do so in the future. I will not pull punches when what is at stake is so great.

While I have no intentions of starting a campaign against our Pontiff, at the same time, I will not look the other way while no one in authority holds these bishops accountable. Were it not for the media coverage of the child abuse scandal, the bishops would not be addressing this issue. It is time that the bishops are held accountable for their actions, and only one person has the religious authority to do that.

I do not know of anyone with whom I agree on every issue, but if RCF is to fight the good fight, we cannot refrain from speaking out for fear of offending someone or of losing some worldly respect. The confusion that exists within the Church today thrives because the so-called good guys did not responsibly and properly exercise their God-given authority. Every bishop wears red to signify his willingness to shed his blood in defense of the Faith. Have you seen any American Bishops bleeding lately?

Father John Hardon, R.I.P. made it very clear to me personally, as well as to others, that unless the laity take some corrective action, one diocese after another will be lost. Father Hardon, himself, told me that these very thoughts came to him from his superiors in Rome.

Another issue that has generated a measure of criticism against RCF has been the endorsement of RCFs activities by Fr. Malachi Martin, R.I.P. Critics have often cited rumors, innuendo, and gossip to justify their complaints. (Is it possible that Fr. Martin may have committed some wrongdoing 40 years in the past? Of course it is possible. Does any one of us have nothing in our past that caused us subsequent remorse and contrition?) However, when I contacted Fr. Hardon to solicit his opinion and advice about Fr. Martins endorsement of RCF, Fr. Hardon explicitly stated that Fr. Martin was right with the Church. In the years that I was privileged to deal with Fr. Martin, everything that he said to me, and every public statement that he made which I read was completely in line with Church teaching. I will, therefore, not apologize for displaying Fr. Martins endorsement. I am honored to do so. To those critics who cannot accept my decision, the best we can hope for is to agree to disagree.

I attend a diocesan parish and have never attended a parish affiliated with the Society of St. Pius X, so I cannot be rightly accused of pushing some hidden agenda. A Mass I once attended in an Albany diocesan church in Oneonta, NY, was celebrated by Bishop Howard Hubbard. According to parish members, the bishop used a homemade bread for the Eucharist that contained honey and other ingredients that would have made the Blessed Sacrament invalid. This is but one small example of what I have heard and witnessed in the last seven years of RCFs existence. The Holy Father knows of these and many more abuses that have occurred with the apparent or outright approval of bishops in good standing with Rome. If the Pope does not take some action, and if he allows the continual deterioration of the Church in dissident dioceses, it may yet come to pass that the only Catholic Mass or faithful teachings to be found in these areas will be at a Pius X chapel.

Accusations of satanism: An exposé by the lay group Roman Catholic Faithful (The allegations concerning Cardinal Bernardin's involvement in satanism are taken from an exposé by Roman Catholic Faithful):

[Roman Catholic Faithful] first heard of Agnes story from a friend in 1996. This friend of mine had met Agnes a few years earlier when she came to him for advice. He never gave me her name or location but only made reference to her situation because it fit into a conversation we were having regarding the Archdiocese of Chicago. In 1998, when I first learned who Agnes was, I found that she had been on RCFs mailing list for some time. I also learned that a private investigator, as well as a lawyer from Chicago who had provided RCF with information, had met with Agnes a few years earlier in an attempt to help her find a way to bear witness to what had happened to her. This same investigator and lawyer provided RCF with information they had obtained regarding the alleged sexual activity of the priest who had abused Agnes many years earlier. That priest was the young Joseph Bernardin.

The allegations of Agnes Over the past 12 years, in sworn deposition, in accounts to investigators, in affidavits submitted in support of others' cases, in direct statements to Bernardin, in phone calls and letters to Church officials, and in correspondence with Vatican officials (all of which RCF has examined), Agnes has testified to the following story:

In the fall of 1957, in Greenville, S.C., Fr. Joseph Bernardin raped 11-year-old Agnes as part of a satanic ritual that involved, among others, Bishop John Russell of Charleston. Brought to the event by an abusive father, Agnes was able, at first, to resist Bishop Russell physically, out of the knowledge that God had made me good, not bad as I was being told I was (her words). As a young child, she had been victimized by a sadist cousin, and her identity was based upon resisting bad things, which included Bernardin. Bernardin then showed kindness and approval of her resistance, in order to gain her trust and get her to relax, and then he raped her. He followed the rape with a perverted use of a host, in an attempt to make Agnes swallow the guilt of the event. In the fall of 1992, Agnes passed a polygraph examination regarding these events. She also, in early 1990, told her story to Malachi Martin, who had been recommended to her as someone who could get her information to the Vatican, which Agnes knew had sole and immediate jurisdiction over such a case. Martin wrote a novel, Windswept House, with the premise that Agnes had given him: that the Catholic hierarchy's tolerance of heresy, liturgical abuse, clerical sexual misconduct, and clerical pedophilia had one overarching explanation at root, a network of Satanists whose smoke had ascended high in the Church. Her story is greatly theatricalized in the novel, but the essential fact of ritual rape is there, as is the spiritual reality of Christ's presence in the victimized child. Thirty-four years later, Agnes went to visit Bishop Russell in a nursing home. In and out of lucidity, he agreed to testify against Bernardin if asked. He died without the opportunity to do so.

Catholic Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo, is an exorcist and the author of the book, Face to Face With the Devil. Archbishop Milingo gave a speech entitled, "Satanists at work in the Vatican" at the Fatima 2000 International Congress on World Peace held in Rome 11/18/96-11/23/96. Mr. Milingo addressed an international audience of bishops, priests, nuns, and laity. Excerpts of the speech were reported in the Winter 1997 issue of The Fatima Crusader, a conservative pro-Marian Catholic newsletter that hosted the Fatima 2000 Congress and the 3/3/97 issue of The New American--

"The devil in the Catholic Church is so protected now that he is like an animal protected by the government; put on a game preserve that outlaws anyone, especially hunters, from trying to capture or kill it. The devil within the Church today is actually protected by certain Church authorities from the official devil-hunter in the Church -- the exorcist. ... To the question, 'Are there men of the curia who are followers of Satan?' Milingo responded, 'Certainly there are priests and bishops. I stop at this level of ecclesiastical hierarchy because I am an archbishop, higher than this I cannot go.' Milingo cited papal statements to back up his charges. 'Paul VI said that the smoke of Satan had entered into the Vatican.'" -- Archbishop Milingo

In The Fatima Crusader article, Malachi Martin, a famous ex-Jesuit, Vatican insider, and best-selling author, is quoted,

"Archbishop Milingo is a good bishop and his contention that there are satanists in Rome is completely correct. Anybody who is acquainted with the state of affairs in the Vatican in the last 35 years is well aware that the prince of darkness has had and still has his surrogates in the court of St. Peter in Rome." In 1990, Martin made reference to a Satanic rite held in Rome in his 1990 non-fiction best-seller about geopolitics and the Vatican, The Keys of This Blood:

Most frighteningly for [Pope] John Paul [II], he had come up against the irremovable presence of a malign strength in his own Vatican and in certain bishops' chanceries. It was what knowledgeable Churchmen called the 'superforce.' Rumors, always difficult to verify, tied its installation to the beginning of Pope Paul VI's reign in 1963. Indeed Paul had alluded somberly to 'the smoke of Satan which has entered the Sanctuary'. . . an oblique reference to an enthronement ceremony by Satanists in the Vatican. Besides, the incidence of Satanic pedophilia  rites and practices  was already documented among certain bishops and priests as widely dispersed as Turin, in Italy, and South Carolina, in the United States. The cultic acts of Satanic pedophilia are considered by professionals to be the culmination of the Fallen Archangel's rites. (p. 632) Martin has revealed much more about this alleged ritual in his recent novel [circa 1996], Windswept House: A Vatican Novel. On page 492 of his book, Fr. Martin. In this story, he vividly describes a ceremony called "The Enthronement of the Fallen Archangel Lucifer" supposedly held in St. Paul's Chapel in the Vatican, but linked with concurrent satanic rites here in the US, on June 29, 1963, barely a week after the election of Paul VI. Just how bad did Martin judge things to be? Extremely so:

"Suddenly it became unarguable that now during this papacy, the Roman Catholic organization carried a permanent presence of clerics who worshipped Satan and liked it; of bishops and priests who sodomized boys and each other; of nuns who performed the "Black Rites" of Wicca, and who lived in lesbian relationships . . . every day, including Sundays and Holy Days, acts of heresy and blasphemy and outrage and indifference were committed and permitted at holy Altars by men who had been called to be priests. Sacrilegious actions and rites were not only performed on Christ's Altars, but had the connivance or at least the tacit permission of certain Cardinals, archbishops, and bishops. . . In total number they were a minorityanything from one to ten percent of Church personnel. But of that minority, many occupied astoundingly high positions or rank.... The facts that brought the Pope to a new level of suffering were mainly two: The systematic organizational linksthe network, in other words that had been established between certain clerical homosexual groups and Satanist covens. And the inordinate power and influence of that network." (Windswept, pp. 492-3) According to The New American, Martin has confirmed that the ceremony did indeed occur as he described. "Oh yes, it is true; very much so," the magazine reported he said. "But the only way I could put that down into print is in novelistic form." He said more members of the clergy becoming aware of the situation, and that Archbishop Milingo was "merely like that actor in the movie Network, who got fed up and said, 'I'm not going to take it anymore.'"

Milingo's remarks have been strangely ignored by the American news media. The New American claimed that a Lexis/Nexis data search found not a single mention of his Fatima 2000 Congress statements, and were informed by an Associated Press researcher that Milingo was considered "a big old mouth" that was always spouting "a lot of insanity," because of his outspoken opinions about the existence of Satan and of miracles.

As for Malachi Martin's book, Windswept House, it has not gotten the critical acclaim or widespread publicity of his past efforts. It has been virtually ignored, even though it is published by Doubleday, a major mainstream house. Reviewers, he said, "are steering away from it. They don't know what to think about it; they don't know what to say."

Malachi Martin passed away in early August 1999. As far as is known, he never recanted on any of his claims that Windswept House was based on an actual satanic ritual in the Vatican in the first days of Pope Paul VI, nor that there is a general satanic conspiracy within the Roman Church.

Pedophilia and Satanism in the Vatican by Ernesto Cienfuegos La Voz de Aztlan

"The smoke of Satan has entered the Sanctuary" Pope Paul IV - 1963

"The cultic acts of Satanic pedophilia in the Catholic Church are considered by professionals to be the culmination of the rites of 'The Enthronement of the Fallen Archangel Lucifer' in the Vatican" Fr. Malachi Martin - 1990 Los Angeles, Alta California - 5/10/2002 - (ACN) The contemporary state of apostasy in the Catholic Church was accurately predicted by the renown Jesuit Priest Malachi Martin in his 1996 book "Windswept House: A Vatican Novel". On page 492 of his book, Fr. Martin writes, "Suddenly it became unarguable that now during this papacy, the Roman Catholic organization carried a permanent presence of clerics who worshipped Satan and liked it; of bishops and priests who sodomized boys and each other; of nuns who performed the Black Rites of Wicca, and who lived in lesbian relationships . . . every day, including Sundays and Holy Days, acts of heresy and blasphemy and outrage and indifference were committed and permitted at holy Altars by men who had been called to be priests. Sacrilegious actions and rites were not only performed on Christs Altars, but had the connivance or at least the tacit permission of certain Cardinals, archbishops, and bishops. . . " Fr. Malachi Martin wrote this six years ago and today we are barely hearing in the news about Catholic priests being arrested for raping altar boys inside the confessionals and about Cardinals, such as Boston's Law and Los Angeles' Mahoney, covering up the crimes.

An eminent theologian and expert in the Catholic Church, Fr. Malachi Martin, writes that the apostasy of the Roman Catholic Church is a precondition for the end of time as we presently know it and for the second coming of Jesus Christ. Fr. Malachi Martin, a Vatican insider, studied Theology at Louvain where he received doctorates in Semitic Languages, Archeology and Oriental History. He also studied at Oxford and at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and served as Professor at the Vatican's Pontifical Biblical Institute. Fr. Malachi Martin was, in addition, a world recognized "Exorcist" and an expert in combating Satan and the practitioners of Demonology. He was also an expert in the Dead Sea Scrolls He served in the Vatican from 1958 to 1964 where he was a close associate of the renowned Jesuit Cardinal Augustin Bea and Pope John XXIII. Fr. Malachi Martin passed away on July 27, 1999.

Fr. Malachi Martin had for a long time maintained that Satanists had infiltrated the Vatican. Just before his death, Fr. Martin said that soon after the installation of Pope Paul VI in 1963, Vatican Satanists clandestinely installed "Lucifer" in a secret ceremony called "The Enthronement of the Fallen Archangel Lucifer". The ceremony was conducted at the St. Pauls Chapel located within the Vatican. Pope Paul VI later wrote that the smoke of Satan has entered the Sanctuary". Fr. Malachi Martin said that the incidence of Satanic pedophilia and its rites and practices was already documented among certain bishops and priests as widely dispersed as Turin, in Italy, and South Carolina, in the United States. He emphasised, "The systematic organizational links of the network,that had been established between certain clerical homosexual groups and Satanist covens had inordinate power and influence."

When we read the news headlines today concerning the evil acts of numerous Catholic priests and even bishops against children, we can not help think about what Fr. Malachi Martin prophesied six years ago. Fr. Martin also said that the "Third Secret of Fatima" concerned the apostasy of the Roman Catholic Church. He said that the essential message seems to be about Satanists lurking in the shadows, from the heart of the Vatican down to the local parishes, manipulating events and putting great effort to subvert the Roman Catholic Church. He said that these Satanists are in league with Zionists and what he called the Universal Assembly, a Masonic group of Western plutocrats and the Illuminati.

Fr. Malachi Martin also spoke about a shadowy evil character he described as the Cardinal of Centurycity, who bears a strange similarity to Cardinal Roger Mahoney of Los(t) Angeles. Presently, there is a growing tide of people calling for his resignation due to the Archdioceses cover-up of the Satanic homosexual pedophile crimes against children.

And where does Pope John Paul II stand in all of this? Pope John Paul II has stated that we are definitely in the end times. He says that "the signs are clear"! The Pope has expressed concerns that his successor will be "the final pope" and the "anti-pope". The anti-pope is a person who will betray true Catholicism and Christianity as part of a pact with "Lucifer" and a future world government.

At the time of his passing on July 27, 1999, Martin was at work on what he said would be his most controversial and important book. Primacy: How the Institutional Roman Catholic Church became a Creature of The New World Order was to deal with power and the papacy. This work was to analyze the revolutionary shift that lies at the heart of what many see as the breakdown of papal power. It was to be a book of predictions about the Vatican and the world in the first decades of the new millennium.

I enjoyed reading those articles. I have read two of Fr. Martin's books - "Windswept House" and "Vatican."

What strikes me most about them, and I'm reminded again today reading the articles, is how silly it is to carry on so much about liturgical abuses, and what Priest is boinking who, and thinking we can really make a difference by complaining, when the Church itself couldn't care less.

Fr. Martin shows what agenda is really important to the Church. It seems like they only pretend to care about our personal holiness.

"What do you think about the prophecies of Saint Malachy? He said there would only be two more popes after the Slavic Pope. "

This is indeed very interesting. If you were to take the birth of Isreal and add a generation (120 years) you come out with somewhere around 2064-about the life time of two more Popes.

From a Protestant perspective I was extremely disappointed in many of the decisions made at the Council of Trent and the prior 200 years leading up to this event. I don't wish to hash all that Luther stuff out here and the Catholics may think this is nonsense. But to me it seems the decisions made at the Council of Trent and subsequent Vatican pronouncements which followed set the stage for where the Catholic Church has positioned itself today. Certainly changes from Vatican I to Vatican II also played a role.

This is intriguing and I will certainly be praying for you.

27
posted on 05/15/2004 3:30:43 PM PDT
by HarleyD
(For strong is he who carries out God's word. (Joel 2:11))

"Jesuits" and "Hostage to the devil" also make interesting (but quite frightening) reading. "Hostage to the devil" persuaded me into performing an "asperges" (much like the asperges for High Mass) of our home with holy water every evening - not to mention increasing devotion to the Sacraments and the holy rosary.

We should remember that even apparitions and prophecies officially approved by the Church (such as La Salette, Fatima, Lourdes etc), as "private revelation", do not form part of the "deposit of Faith" - and therefore Catholics may reject them (albeit at their peril). The rejection of dogma (that is widespread today) is quite another matter. While on the subject of prophecies, here's one I find interesting: http://www.olrl.org/prophecy/prophecy.shtml

Get Martin's book The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church from a library and look at where he talks about St. Sylvester I. There is a totally invented story in this "history" book about the descendants of St. Jude meeting Pope St. Sylvester to ask that the primacy of the Church of Jerusalem be "restored". There is absolutely no source which contains this. It is simply made up entirely. Destroys all his credibility for "secret" revelations, as far as I'm concerned. Take a look here, for example:

The Roman Catholic historian Malachi Martin attempts to confine these lines of desposyni as follows. These were:

one from Joachim and Anna, Jesus maternal grand parents. One from Elizabeth, first cousin of Jesus mother, Mary, and Elizabeths husband Zachary. And one from Cleophas and his wife who was also a first cousin of Mary (M Martin Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, Secker and Warburg, London, 1981, p. 42).

He acknowledges that there were numerous blood descendants of Joseph (p. 43) but, as all Roman Catholics, he seems to attempt to deny their direct lineage from Mariam or Mary, even though he acknowledges they had clung to the Church throughout the early years. Maria is removed to first cousin and not sister as the Bible says.

Martin records that the descendants, as leaders of the Church, held a meeting with Sylvester bishop of Rome about the whole nature of the Church in the year 318 CE (ibid.). The emperor provided sea transport as far as Ostia for eight of them and then they rode on donkeys to Rome and the Lateran where Sylvester now lived in splendour. They wore rough woollen clothes, with leather boots and hats. The conversation was in Greek as they spoke Aramaic and had no Latin, and Sylvester spoke no Aramaic. Martin considers it probable that Joses the oldest of the Christian Jews spoke on their behalf. (CCG, "The Virgin Mariam and the Family of Jesus Christ")

The Roman church had come to be wealthy under patronage. When Constantine tried to establish the Christian system in order to use it, he gave the edict of Toleration at Milan circa 314 CE. After this, the Christians became influential. In 318 CE, the emperor paid for the travel of the family of Christ to Rome to confer with bishop Sylvester at the Lateran Palace. He was, by this time, a very wealthy person living like a prince. The party of the family of Christ came by ship to the port of Ostia and then they went by donkey to Rome. They were dressed in woollen homespun garments and leather hats and boots. They spoke Aramaic and Greek. Bishop Sylvester spoke only Latin and Greek so the conversation was carried on in Greek. It seems likely that Simon was their spokesman (see the paper The Nicolaitans (No. 202) and also the ex-Jesuit historian Malachi Martin The Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, pp. 42 ff).

They expressed their concern that the laws of God had been removed as the basis of the church. They wanted the Sabbath reinstated. It had been made inferior to Sunday from the Council of Elvira in 300 CE. They argued for the Torah, which was the Hebrew name given to the law of God, to be reinstated to its correct position. That included the Holy Days and food laws. They asked that the Greek bishops put into Alexandria and Antioch and elsewhere be replaced by the family of Christ. They asked also that Jerusalem again be made the centre of the faith and the money for the church be able to be sent there.

They went home. Instead of using his influence with Constantine to reform the church of these Gnostic influences and restore it to the true faith once delivered to the saints, as the brother of Christ wrote (Jude 3), Sylvester set about destroying the faith and the family of Christ with it. (CCG, "Modern Christian Fundamentalism: A Contradiction in Terms")

...A meeting between Sylvester and the Jewish Christian leaders took place in 318....The vital interview was not, as far as we know, recorded, but the issues were very well known, and it is probable the Joses, the oldest of the Christian Jews , spoke on behalf of the desposyni and the rest.

...That most hallowed name, desposyni, had been respected by all believers in the first century and a half of Christian history. The word literally meant, in Greek, "belonging to the Lord." It was reserved uniquely for Jesus' blood relatives. Every part of the ancient Jewish Christian church had always been governed by a desposynos, and each of them carried one of the names traditional in Jesus' family---Zachary, Joseph, John, James, Joses, Simeon, Matthias, and so on. But no one was ever called Jesus. Neither Sylvester nor any of the thirty-two popes before him, nor those succeeding him, ever emphasized that there were at least three well-known and authentic lines of legitimate blood descent from Jesus' own family...

...The Desposyni demanded that Sylvester, who now had Roman patronage, revoke his confirmation of the authority of the Greek Christian bishops at Jerusalem, in Antioch, in Ephesus, and in Alexandria, and to name desposynos bishops to take their place. They asked that the practice of sending cash to Jerusalem as the mother church be resumed... These blood relatives of Christ demanded the reintroduction of the Law, which included the Sabbath and the Holy Day system of Feasts and New Moons of the Bible. Sylvester dismissed their claims and said that, from now on, the mother church was in Rome and he insisted they accept the Greek bishops to lead them.

...This was the last known dialogue with the Sabbath-keeping church in the east led by the disciples who were descended from blood relatives of Jesus the Messiah. [Decline and Fall of the Roman Church, New York: Bantam, 1983. pages 30-31]

I don't know what the source of your data is or the source of Fr. Martin's, but given the abject satanic and unholy state of the clergy and Fr. Martin's verifiable history as an insider, I have no trouble believing it happened. It's not proof but it is believable.

37
posted on 05/15/2004 7:10:10 PM PDT
by Canticle_of_Deborah
(The day the Church abandons her universal tongue is the day before she returns to the catacombs-PXII)

To further illustrate what I was saying about dogma: http://www.fatimacrusader.com/cr74/cr74pg10.aspIt appears that bishops, priests, and yes even our dear deacons, have abandoned the defense of Catholic Dogma in favor of Assisi-style interfaith exercises and "caring for the dogs". I suppose you could say - Dogma has gone to the dogs!

Thanks for a great thread Narses. When the USCCB came up with their zero tolerance policy,designed for public consumption,I questioned whether or not some of the one time offender priests may not have ben exorcized. My thoughts were,if they had been exorcized,wouldn't holy Bishops,who had called for the exorcism considered the problem/crime/sin as addressed and resolved permanently?

It seemed to me that if a priest had been "possessed",and a successful exorcism had taken place,the priest should not be suspended,defrocked or laicized or what ever the term would be,nor should the Bishop be culpable. It would follow that successor B/bishops would also not be at fault.

I brought the possibility up pretty frequently on the religious forum and NEVER got a response from anyone. I also never heard the B/bishops even allude to that possibility. I decided that the "silence" was really strange and dropped it. Reading these comments brings it to mind again. Any thoughts?

Yes,the new rite is weak. I am aware of Amsworth's book and his analysis of the deficiencies of the new rite. However,I was only speaking to the ancient rite as performed in the 70's and a priest who had never received another complaint.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.